3 ms·
The Co-pilot of Air France 447 could fit that description. He went to fly highly automated Airbus planes as soon as possible, which means only 250 hours on diff
by Anarch157a 3y ago
The Co-pilot of Air France 447 could fit that description. He went to fly highly automated Airbus planes as soon as possible, which means only 250 hours on different types. He didn't had a proper understanding of how stalls worked, since Airbus automation makes it almost impossible to stall the plane, unless something goes horribly wrong and it reverts to manual law, which is what happened in that flight. When the captain returned to the cockpit, he immediately recognized the situation as a deep stall, but then it was too late.
Mentour Pilot video on the issue: https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=e5AGHEUxLME&t=1 https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=e5AGHEUxLME&t=1
- antonvs 3y agoSure, but that was an exceptional situation, not some sort of systemic problem. It’s also relatively easy to guard against in future.
- illiac786 3y agowell but it is very difficult to guard against all exceptional situation requiring some basic aviation skills. i think the point made is that you can fix leaks one by one, which takes a very long time, or you can know the abstraction layer below. fixing one leak and assuming there isn’t any other is not the right strategy, is my point.
- lobocinza 3y agoIt does looks systemic. Modern planes being design to fly by themselves and new pilots being trained as button pushers with no intuition over the machine they are supposed to control in an emergency. Not that automation is bad but the brain-machine interface is degraded at this point.